BRAFV600E mutation analysis by immunohistochemistry in patients with thoracic metastases from colorectal cancer

Prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations in metastatic colorectal cancer patients by tumor sidedness: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Studies have shown that the prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations may differ by tumor sidedness among metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Both mutation status and tumor sidedness may impact survival and disease progression and RAS mutation status has been shown to predict response to anti‐epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy. A systematic literature review and meta‐analysis were conducted to estimate the pooled prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations by tumor sidedness in studies of mCRC patients. Forty‐four studies comprising 15 981 mCRC patients tested for RAS and/or BRAF mutations were included in the meta‐analyses. The prevalence of RAS mutations differed significantly by tumor side (32.4% among left‐sided tumors, 41.3% among right‐sided tumors; P = .017), as did the prevalence of KRAS mutations (35.8% among left‐sided tumors, 46.3% among right‐sided tumors; P < .0001) and BRAF mutations (4.3% among left‐sided tumors, 16.3% among right‐sided tumors; P < .0001). Among right‐sided tumors, the prevalence of RAS and KRAS mutations varied significantly by study design, with higher prevalence among observational studies than clinical trials, and there was significant variation by study location for the prevalence of KRAS mutations in left‐sided tumors and the prevalence of BRAF mutations in right‐sided tumors. These results help to better characterize the mCRC population to better inform clinicians and researchers. Few of the included studies reported overall or progression‐free survival (PFS) by both tumor sidedness and mutation status. As both of these factors may have prognostic impact, future studies should consider evaluating survival by these variables.

Immunohistochemistry with Anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) Mouse Monoclonal Antibody is a Sensitive Method for Detection of the BRAF V600E Mutation in Colon Cancer: Evaluation of 120 Cases with and without KRAS Mutation and Literature Review

The major aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) antibody in colorectal tumors with and without KRAS mutation. KRAS and BRAF are two major oncogenic drivers of colorectal cancer (CRC) that have been frequently described as mutually exclusive, thus the BRAF V600E mutation is not expected to be present in the cases with KRAS mutation. In addition, a review of 25 studies comparing immunohistochemistry (IHC) using the anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) antibody with BRAF V600E molecular testing in 4041 patient samples was included. One-hundred and twenty cases with/without KRAS or BRAF mutations were acquired. The tissue were immunostained with anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) antibody with OptiView DAB IHC detection kit. The KRAS mutated cases with equivocal immunostaining were further evaluated by Sanger sequencing for BRAF V600E mutation. Thirty cases with BRAF V600E mutation showed unequivocal, diffuse, uniform, positive cytoplasmic staining and 30 cases with wild-type KRAS and BRAF showed negative staining with anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) antibody. Out of 60 cases with KRAS mutation, 56 cases (93.3%) were negative for BRAF V600E mutation by IHC. Four cases showed weak, equivocal, heterogeneous, cytoplasmic staining along with nuclear staining in 25-90% of tumor cells. These cases were confirmed to be negative for BRAF V600E mutation by Sanger sequencing. Overall, IHC with anti-BRAF V600E (VE1) antibody using recommended protocol with OptiView detection is optimal for detection of BRAF V600E mutation in CRC. Our data are consistent with previous reports indicating that KRAS and BRAF V600E mutation are mutually exclusive.

Immunohistochemical staining for p16 and BRAFV600E is useful to distinguish between sporadic and hereditary (Lynch syndrome-related) microsatellite instable colorectal carcinomas

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) protein analysis by immunohistochemistry (IHC) can identify colorectal cancer (CRC) with microsatellite instability (MSI). As MLH1-deficient CRC can be hereditary or sporadic, markers to distinguish between them are needed. MLH1 promoter methylation assay is the reference method; however, sometimes, it is challenging on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples. We assessed by IHC the expression of BRAFV600E, p16, MGMT, and CDX2 in 55 MLH1-deficient MSI CRC samples (of which 8 had a germline MLH1 mutation) to determine whether this panel differentiates between sporadic and hereditary CRCs. We also analyzed MLH1 promoter methylation by methylation-specific PCR and pyrosequencing and BRAF status by genotyping. None of the hereditary CRCs showed MLH1 methylation, BRAF mutation, BRAFV600E-positive immunostaining, or loss of p16 expression. We detected MLH1 promoter methylation in 67 % and a BRAF mutation in 42 % of CRC, all showing MLH1 promoter methylation. BRAFV600E IHC and BRAF genotyping gave concordant results in all but two samples. Loss of expression of p16 was found in 30 % of CRC with methylation of the MLH1 promoter, but its expression was retained in all non-methylated and part of MLH1-methylated tumors (100 % specificity, 30 % sensitivity). CDX2 and MGMT expression was not associated with MLH1 status. Thus, BRAFV600E and p16 IHC may help in differentiating sporadic from hereditary MLH1-deficient CRC with MSI. Specifically, p16 IHC might be used as a surrogate marker for MLH1 promoter methylation, because all p16-negative CRCs displayed MLH1 methylation, whereas hereditary CRCs were all p16-positive.

Utility of BRAF V600E Immunohistochemistry Expression Pattern as a Surrogate of BRAF Mutation Status in 154 Patients with Advanced Melanoma

Successful BRAF inhibitor therapy depends on the accurate assessment of the mutation status of the BRAF V600 residue in tissue samples. In melanoma, immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis with monoclonal anti-BRAF V600E has emerged as a sensitive and specific surrogate of BRAF V600E mutation, particularly when BRAF V600E protein expression is homogeneous and strong. A subset of melanomas exhibit heterogeneous labeling for BRAF V600E, but our understanding of the significance of heterogeneous BRAF V600E IHC expression is limited. We used next-generation sequencing to compare BRAF V600E IHC staining patterns in 154 melanomas: 79 BRAF(WT) and 75 BRAF (including 53 V600E) mutants. Agreement among dermatopathologists on tumor morphology, IHC expression, and intensity was excellent (ρ = 0.99). A predominantly epithelioid cell phenotype significantly correlated with the BRAF V600E mutation (P = .0085). Tumors demonstrating either heterogeneous or homogeneous IHC expression were significantly associated with the BRAF V600E mutation (P < .0001), as was increased intensity of staining (P < .0001). The positive predictive value was 98% for homogenous IHC expression compared with 70% for heterogeneous labeling. Inclusion of both heterogeneous and homogeneous BRAF V600E IHC expression as a positive test significantly improved IHC test sensitivity from 85% to 98%. However, this reduced BRAF V600E IHC test specificity from 99% to 96%. Cautious evaluation of heterogeneous BRAF V600E IHC expression is warranted and comparison with sequencing results is critical, given its reduced test specificity and positive predictive value for detecting the BRAF V600E mutation.

BRAF V600E mutation-specific antibody: A review

The significance of BRAF mutations in neoplasia was first recognized in 2002 when mutations were discovered in a broad range of cancers. Numerous subsequent studies expanded our understanding of BRAF V600E as a critical diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarker in many cancers. Additionally, the advent of small-molecule inhibitors of BRAF V600E rendered assessment of BRAF mutation status essential in tumors such as melanoma. In clinical practice, evaluation of BRAF mutation status has routinely been performed by DNA-based assays utilizing polymerase chain reaction (PCR). However, molecular testing is not available at many hospitals since it is time-consuming, expensive, and requires expertise in molecular techniques. The first BRAF V600E-specific antibody was reported in 2011 (clone VE1). A purified version of this antibody as well as a second monoclonal antibody targeted to BRAF V600E is now commercially available. In this review, clinicopathologic characteristics associated with BRAF-mutant tumors will be highlighted, and the prognostic and predictive implications of a BRAF V600E mutation will be discussed with a focus on melanoma, thyroid carcinoma and colorectal carcinoma. Additionally, we will review the correlation between immunohistochemistry and molecular results and deliberate how BRAF immunohistochemistry might be utilized in the evaluation of these tumors.

A further investigation of combined mismatch repair and BRAFV600E mutation specific immunohistochemistry as a predictor of overall survival in colorectal carcinoma

Mutation specific immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a promising new technique to detect the presence of the BRAFV600E mutation in colorectal carcinoma (CRC). When performed in conjunction with mismatch repair (MMR) IHC, BRAFV600E IHC can help to further triage genetic testing for Lynch Syndrome. In a cohort of 1426 patients undergoing surgery from 2004 to 2009 we recently demonstrated that the combination of MMR and BRAFV600E IHC holds promise as a prognostic marker in CRC, particularly because of its ability to identify the poor prognosis MMR proficient (MMRp) BRAFV600E mutant subgroup. We attempted to validate combined MMR and BRAFV600E IHC as a prognostic indicator in a separate cohort comprising consecutive CRC patients undergoing surgery from 1998 to 2003. IHC was performed on a tissue microarray containing tissue from 1109 patients with CRC. The 5 year survivals stratified by staining patterns were: MMRd/BRAFwt 64%, MMRd/BRAFV600E 64%, MMRp/BRAFwt 60% and MMRp/BRAFV600E 53%. Using the poor prognosis MMRp/BRAFV600E phenotype as baseline, univariate Cox regression modelling demonstrated the following hazard ratios for death: MMRd/BRAFwt HR = 0.71 (95%CI = 0.40–1.27), p = 0.31; MMRd/BRAFV600E HR = 0.74 (95%CI = 0.51–1.07), p = 0.11 and MMRp/BRAFwt HR = 0.79 (95%CI = 0.60–1.04), p = 0.09. Although the findings did not reach statistical significance, this study supports the potential role of combined MMR and BRAF IHC as prognostic markers in CRC.